The Labour Party’s plan to grant amnesty to over 44,000 illegal migrants has sparked a heated debate over the potential impact on Britain’s public services. Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government is proposing to end the practice of removing illegal migrants to offshore processing centers, such as those in Rwanda, allowing them to stay in the UK with full access to welfare benefits.
An internal assessment by the Home Office has estimated that the long-term cost of providing welfare benefits to these migrants could reach £17.8 billion. This has led to concerns among critics who argue that the policy will place an undue burden on taxpayers and strain already overstretched public services.
Former immigration minister Robert Jenrick has expressed his concerns, stating that the amnesty will increase pressure on GP surgeries, social housing, and schools. Jenrick also accused Starmer of surrendering to people-smuggling gangs by allowing illegal migrants to stay in the country.
The debate has been further fueled by the sharp contrast between the savings claimed by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper and the estimated long-term costs. Cooper argues that ending the Rwanda scheme will save the taxpayer £7 billion, but critics like former Conservative MP Nick Timothy warn that the true cost of Labour’s amnesty plan could be much higher.
As more illegal migrants continue to arrive in Britain, with over 20,000 crossing the English Channel this year alone, the pressure on public services is expected to increase. The long-term implications of Labour’s amnesty policy are becoming clearer, and many are questioning whether it is the right decision for the country.
